CASE HISTORY

Diagnosing a Steam Turbine

Governor Problem at EQUATE Petrochemical
This case history documents how
GE Energy’s System 1* software
was used in identifying the root
cause of a unique high vibration
problem encountered during
the post-maintenance start-up
of a critical mechanical-drive
steam turbine at the EQUATE
Petrochemical complex in Kuwait.

Joy.P.Francis. – Specialist, Condition Monitoring – EQUATE Petrochemical Company, Kuwait – puthenjf@equate.com

3 6 O R B I T Vol.29 No.1 2009

 CASE HISTORY

Vo l . 2 9 N o. 1 2 0 0 9 ORB I T 3 7
CASE HISTORY

Machine Description
The machine detailed in this case history is a 1547
kW back-pressure steam turbine (Figure 1) driving a
high-pressure multi-stage boiler feed pump at 4200
rpm. The turbine is forced lubricated, incorporates
tilting-pad thrust bearings at the steam end, and uses
a Woodward® Peak® 150 governor for speed control.
The entire train is monitored continuously via a Bently
Nevada 3500 Series Machinery Protection System
connected to System 1 software.

Figure 1. Back-pressure steam turbine running

Events Leading up to the at 4200 rpm and driving a multi-stage, high-
Machinery Problem pressure boiler feed pump (not shown in photo –
to right of coupling guard).
During a turnaround in April 2006, the existing labyrinth
seal was replaced with a special bearing isolator (BI) as
a part of a modification to arrest an oil leak from the
turbine bearings. This particular BI is slightly wider than
conventional designs; it also incorporates an extra oil
deflector ring at the bearing ends. The cross-sectional
diagram of Figure 2 shows the BIs and the oil deflectors
on the turbine rotor.

Initial Vibration Problem on

Outboard Bearing
On 5 April 2006, the turbine was started for an uncoupled
test run, and the shaft vibration amplitude at the exhaust
Figure 2. Cross-sectional diagram showing
end bearing recorded more than 100 microns pk-pk (3.94 arrangement of bearing isolators and oil
mils pk-pk), reaching the trip setpoint. With System 1 deflectors on turbine rotor.
software in place and providing continuous information
on machine condition, valuable data were captured and
available for diagnosis. However, since the Keyphasor*
probe was installed on the pump (not the turbine), only
shows the results of this run; analysis of this time signal
unfiltered vibration signals were available for analysis.
indicated high runout at the drive end probe landing
[Editor’s Note: Good engineering practice is to install a Keyphasor
phase reference transducer on the driver rather than on the driven area. This was initially puzzling because the turbine
machine, allowing a phase reference for uncoupled test runs, exactly inspection report showed acceptable shaft runout
as in the scenario described here. This is why industry standards such
as API 670 require the phase reference transducer to be mounted on values, conflicting with the most recently acquired data.
the driver rather than driven machine only.]
The turbine was shut down and runout tests were
The unit was then run at slow-roll speed to determine conducted on both bearings. Runout of 100 microns
whether the readings were in fact high vibration or pk-pk (3.94 mils pk-pk) and 26 microns pk-pk (1.0 mil
simply excessive mechanical/electrical runout. Figure 3 pk-pk) were detected at the exhaust and inlet ends
respectively.

3 8 O R B I T Vol.29 No.1 2009

 CASE HISTORY

Figure 5. Following removal of the oil deflector

Figure 3. Timebase signatures gathered during
rings and reinstallation of the original labyrinth
slow-roll conditions from turbine exhaust (top)
seals, three separate startups were attempted
and inlet (bottom) bearing radial probes respec-
but aborted due to high vibration amplitudes.
tively. The waveforms are indicative slow-roll
runout or so-called “glitch.”

Figure 4. Cross-sectional diagram of turbine rotor

showing close proximity of oil deflector rings to
radial vibration probes. Because the face of the
oil deflector rings was not perfectly perpendicu-
lar, the wobble was observed by the probes and
accounted for the high slow-roll runout readings.
Figure 6. Timebase signatures gathered during
44 rpm slow-roll conditions from turbine exhaust
(top) and inlet (bottom) bearing radial probes
respectively. The amplitudes were considerably
lower than before removal of the oil deflector
rings, but still above API recommended limits.

Vo l . 2 9 N o. 1 2 0 0 9 ORB I T 3 9
CASE HISTORY

Investigation into the source of the runout focused on

the newly installed oil seal deflectors (Figure 4). These
were found to have high face runout and were located
in very close proximity (~ 2 mm) to the radial probes. The
deflector is shrunk fit to the shaft and the face runout (i.e.,
wobbling action) of this ring was within the observable
sideview field of the radial probe; consequently, it intro-
duced erroneous readings into the radial vibration signal.

Based on these findings, it was decided to revert back to

the previous labyrinth seals due to time constraints and
the practical difficulties in straightening and correcting
the perpendicularity of the welded oil deflector rings.
Continuing Problems
The turbine rotor was dismantled to revert back to the
previous labyrinth seals. The outage was also used to
perform an overhaul of the governor actuator to correct
“hunting” of the governor valve that had been observed
during the previous start-ups.
Following this work, the turbine was restarted on 9 April
2006 for a coupled run.
Unfortunately, the machine experienced what appeared
to be very high vibration amplitudes of 150 microsn
pk-pk (6 mils pk-pk) immediately after start-up at the
steam end x-probe as shown in Figure 5. As a result,
three separate startup attempts had to be aborted.
Further start-up attempts were abandoned until
detailed vibration analysis could be conducted. The
slow-roll runout levels were again checked on the steam
and exhaust ends at very low speeds of around 44 rpm
(Figure 6). The runout levels were 33 and 13 microns
pk-pk at steam and exhaust ends respectively.
Though the magnitude of this runout was above the
API limits, it was not enough to explain the excessive
momentary vibration increase at start-up during the
coupled run. Consequently, the root cause of the high
vibration remained unanswered.
An external speed probe was temporarily installed to
allow the capture of filtered vibration data, and the tur-
bine was tested uncoupled by running up to full speed.
The vibration levels were acceptable at both steam and
Figure 7. Bode plots during uncoupled run from
turbine exhaust (top) and inlet (bottom) bearing
radial probes respectively. The amplitudes were
within expected ranges.
exhaust end bearings as shown in Figure 7, staying
below 40 microns pk-pk (1.6 mils pk-pk).
In addition to the Bode plots of Figure 7, spectrum plots
were also examined. These showed a high-amplitude
component occurring at a very low frequency
(approximately 0.625 Hz). This was initially thought to
be spurious signal noise; however, analysis of the shaft
centerline plots revealed a different scenario.
The shaft centerline plot is polar representation of the
shaft’s centerline as a function of time or changing
speed. It is often used during startup or coastdown to
show how the shaft climbs up the oil wedge to assume
a stable position within the bearing clearance, graphi-
cally depicting the average radial position of the shaft
within its bearings at various speeds.
The shaft centerline plot of Figure 8a does not show
expected behavior; instead, it depicts an almost instan-
taneous (note that the time stamps are all within two
seconds of one another) change in shaft position from
the bottom of the bearing clearance at the 6:00 position
to an unstable position in the top half of the bearing
clearance circle. This abrupt movement of the shaft
towards the X-probe during the coupled startup is highly
unusual and the timebase plot of Figure 8c confirms
the nearly instant step-change in the average value.
Essentially, it shows a DC step change (the gap voltage)
upon which is superimposed the AC vibration waveform.
Continued on page 42.

4 0 O R B I T Vol.29 No.1 2009

SIDEBAR ARTICLE
CASE HISTORY

Considered one of the world’s leading petrochemical Diethylene Glycol (DEG), which are marketed by
producers, EQUATE Petrochemical Company is a MEGlobal, a separate PIC and Dow joint venture.
Kuwait-based international joint venture between
To meet ever-increasing worldwide demand
Petrochemical Industries Company (PIC), The Dow
for excellent petrochemical products, EQUATE’s
Chemical Company (Dow), Boubyan Petrochemical
shareholders have completed a multi-billion
Co m p any (BP C) an d Q urain Pet ro ch emical
expansion project which greatly increases the
Industries Company (QPIC).
existing production of PE and EG.
As a world-class petro-
Emerging as Greater EQUATE,
c h e m i c a l p r o d u c e r, EQ UAT E
this $3 billion global-scale
currently provides markets in
venture added SM to EQUATE’s
the Middle Eas t, A sia, Africa
product por tfolio. Paraxylene
and Europe with high-quality
and Benzene are also produced
petrochemical products.
at the same location from a new
E Q U AT E p r o d u c e s — a n d i t s wo r l d - cl a s s A ro m a t ic s p l ant
commercial face, the EQUATE which is managed by EQUATE.
Marketing Company (EMC),
Hand-in-hand with being a
markets—a wide range of
leading market player, EQUATE is
p o lyet hy l en e (PE ), f ro m lin e ar l o w d en si t y
an empowered, competency-based organization
(LLDPE) to high molecular weight high-density
applying best practices and leading technology
resins (HDPE). Recently EMC has also begun
i n m a r ke t i n g , s a l e s , re cr u i t m e nt & ca re e r
selling Styrene Monomer (SM) produced from
development, environment, health & safety,
Greater EQUATE’s expanded facilities. EQUATE
industrial operations, and administrative affairs.
Vo l . 2 9 N o. 1 2 0 0 9 ORB I T 4 1
also produces Monoethylene Glycol (MEG) and
CASE HISTORY

Figure 8. The shaft centerline plot (a) at left depicts an almost instantaneous change in the shaft’s average
position as can be noted by the timestamps which are all within two seconds of one another. The amplitude
trend (b) at upper right provides another view of this sudden change, as does the timebase waveform (c) at
lower left which assumes the shape of a step change upon which is superimposed the AC vibration signal.

This sudden change in gap voltage as the shaft

abruptly shifted towards the X-probe was detected and
interpreted as vibration by the X-probe, resulting in the
spiking vibration of Figure 5.

Since the phenomenon was observed only during

the coupled startup, it was apparent that the shaft
movement was steam-induced (the steam throughput
is much higher in a coupled run than in an uncoupled
run due to the additional load imposed by the pump).
As such, attention was focused on the turbine governor
control as the potential source of problems (Figure 9).
Figure 9. Governor actuator assembly.
Root cause Investigation
Investigation revealed that when the governor actuator speed. As a result, the sudden inrush of the excessive
had been overhauled during reinstallation of the original steam flow momentarily pushed the rotor upward.
labyrinth seals, the actuator stroke was changed, This upward force, along with the bearing fluid forces,
altering the start-up sequence. The governor, initially caused a resultant force in the direction of the X-probe.
configured in auto-start mode, had been modified to This phenomenon did not occur during uncoupled runs,
manual mode; thus, the turbine ramped directly to mini- as the magnitude of steam throughput is much less
mum governor speed without dwelling at the slow–roll than in coupled load runs.

4 2 O R B I T Vol.29 No.1 2009

 CASE HISTORY

Figure 10. Trend of vibration data during final startup (bottom) shows vibration levels below 60 microns
pk-pk (2.5 mils pk-pk), consistent with normal levels. The shaft centerline plot at upper left also shows normal
response, with the centerline climbing up the oil wedge as the shaft speed increases from 0 to 4200 rpm. For
a shaft rotating in the counter-clockwise direction, it will slowly climb up the right wall of the bearing with
increasing speed, exactly as shown, before assuming a stable position at running speed.

To test this hypothesis, the turbine was started slowly by
manually controlling the steam admission. As expected,
the turbine ramped slowly to full speed with very low
vibration levels and a normal shaft centerline response
as shown in Figure 10.
units can only run when this unit runs. Without dynamic
data capture and a full complement of plot types such as
shaft centerline, slow-roll timebase, and spectrum, the
problem would have been extremely difficult to diagnose
and would have taken considerably longer.

As such, this case history emphasizes the importance

Conclusion
Left unchecked, the high initial steam flow caused by
the improper governor startup control has the potential
to deform the shaft. The ability to diagnose this problem
allowed us to not only prevent possible permanent dam-
age to the shaft, it saved us approximately one week’s
production losses due to a cascade effect whereby other
of different formats of vibration data provided by
GE Energy’s System 1 software. The appropriate use of
this data helps the Equate condition monitoring team to
fully comprehend the problem by effective and accurate
vibration analysis. In this case, the shaft centerline plot,
when examined with respect to time, was particularly
instrumental in the accurate and timely diagnosis of
both the problem and its root cause.
* denotes a trademark of Bently Nevada, LLC, a wholly owned
subsidiary of General Electric Company.

Vo l . 2 9 N o. 1 2 0 0 9 ORB I T 4 3